Transsplenic portal vein reconstruction-transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt in a patient with portal and splenic vein thrombosis

Portal Vein Reconstruction-trans Jugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt and Portal Vein Stenting in Patients With Extrahepatic Portal Vein Obstruction

Extrahepatic portal vein thrombosis (EHPVO) is an uncommon cause of portal hypertension. In the long term, patients may develop portal cavernoma cholangiopathy (PCC). Up to 30%-40% of patients with EHPVO may not have shuntable veins and are often difficult to manage surgically. Interventional treatment including portal vein recanalisation-trans jugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (PVRecan-TIPS) has been used for patients with EHPVO. However, PV reconstruction-trans jugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (PVRecon-TIPS) and portal vein stenting are novel techniques for managing such patients with EHPVO with non-shuntable venous anatomy. In contrast to PVRecan-TIPS, PV reconstruction-TIPS (PVRecon-TIPS) is performed through intrahepatic collaterals. Here we present six cases of PCC who presented with recurrent acute variceal bleeding (AVB) and or refractory biliary stricture. They did not have any shuntable veins. PVRecon-TIPS was performed for five patients whilst PV stenting was done in one. Amongst the six patients, one died of sepsis whilst one who developed hyponatremia and hepatic encephalopathy was salvaged with conservative management. Following the procedure, they were started on anti-coagulation. Decompression of cavernoma was documented in all other patients. Biliary changes improved completely in 40% of patients.

Preoperative portal vein recanalization-transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for chronic obliterative portal vein thrombosis: Outcomes following liver transplantation

High-grade portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is often considered to be a technically challenging scenario for liver transplantation (LT) and in some centers a relative contraindication. This study compares patients with chronic obliterative PVT who underwent portal vein recanalization-transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (PVR-TIPS) and subsequent LT to those with partial nonocclusive PVT who underwent LT without an intervention. This institutional review board-approved study analyzed 49 patients with cirrhosis with PVT from 2000 to 2020 at our institution. Patients were divided into two groups, those that received PVR-TIPS due to anticipated surgical challenges from chronic obliterative PVT and those who did not because of partial PVT. Demographic data and long-term outcomes were compared. A total of 35 patients received PVR-TIPS while 14 did not, with all receiving LT. Patients with PVR-TIPS had a higher Yerdel score and frequency of cavernoma than those that did not. PVR-TIPS was effective in decreasing portosystemic gradient (16 down to 8 mm HG; p < 0.05). Both groups allowed for end-to-end anastomoses in >90% of cases. However, veno-veno bypass was used significantly more in patients who did not receive PVR-TIPS. Additionally, patients without PVR-TIPS required significantly more intraoperative red blood cells. Overall survival was not different between groups. PVR-TIPS demonstrated efficacy in resolving PVT and allowed for end-to-end portal vein anastomoses. PVR-TIPS is a viable treatment option for chronic obliterative PVT with or without cavernoma that simplifies the surgical aspects of LT.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts in portal vein thrombosis: A review

The presence of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) has previously been considered a contraindication to the insertion of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPSS). However, patients with PVT may have portal hypertension complications and may thus benefit from TIPSS to reduce portal venous pressure. There is an increasing body of literature that discusses the techniques and outcomes of TIPSS in PVT. This review summarizes the techniques, indications and outcomes of TIPSS in PVT in published case reports, case series and comparative trials, especially regarding the reduction in portal hypertensive complications such as variceal bleeding. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using MEDLINE and PubMed databases. Manuscripts published in English between 1 January 1990 and 1 March 2021 were used. Abstracts were screened and data from potentially relevant articles analyzed. TIPSS in PVT has been reported with high levels of technical success, short-term portal vein recanalization and long-term PV patency and TIPSS patency outcomes. Several comparative studies, including randomized controlled trials, have shown favorable outcomes of TIPSS compared with non-TIPSS treatment of PVT complications. Outcomes of TIPSS with PVT appear similar to those in TIPSS without PVT. However, TIPSS may be more technically difficult in the presence of PVT, and such procedures should be performed in expert high-volume centers to mitigate the risk of procedural complications. The presence of PVT should no longer be considered a contraindication to TIPSS. TIPSS for PVT has been acknowledged as a therapeutic strategy in recent international guidelines, although further studies are needed before recommendations can be strengthened. KEY POINTS: Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is no longer a contraindication to the insertion of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPSS) TIPSS often leads to the spontaneous dissolution of PVT, but can be combined with mechanical or pharmacological thrombectomy TIPSS reduces portal hypertensive complications of PVT, such as variceal bleeding, and can also facilitate liver transplantation where PVT may otherwise interfere with vascular anastomoses Studies have shown favorable long-term outcomes of TIPSS compared with TIPSS without PVT; as well as compared with non-TIPSS treatment of PVT complications TIPSS in PVT should be performed in high-volume specialist centers due to technical difficulties.

Multivisceral transplant as an option to transplant cirrhotic patients with severe portal vein thrombosis

Non-tumoral portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a critical complication in the patient with advanced cirrhosis awaiting liver transplantation (LT). With the evolution of liver transplant (LT) technique, PVT has morphed from an absolute contraindication to a relative contraindication, depending on the grade of the thrombus. The Yerdel classification is one system of grading PVT severity. Patients with Yerdel class 1-3 PVT can undergo LT at centers with experience in complex portal vein (PV) dissection, thrombectomy, and reconstruction. Class 4 PVT, however, is even more complex and may require heroic techniques such as cavoportal hemitransposition, PV arterialization or multivisceral transplant (MVT). Some centers use a MVT back-up approach for patients with Yerdel class 4 PVT. In these patients, all organs with PV outflow are procured simultaneously as a cluster graft from a deceased donor (liver, pancreas, intestine±stomach). If physiologic PV inflow is established intraoperatively, the recipient undergoes LT. Otherwise the MVT graft is transplanted. MVT establishes physiologic PV flow, but transplantation of the intestine confers significant lifelong risks including rejection, graft-versus host disease and post-transplant lymphoma. Yerdel class 1-4 PVT patients undergoing successful LT have 5-year survival similar to non-PVT patients, while patients requiring full MVT experience somewhat higher mortality because of the complexity of the surgery and medical management.